Comparison of Freelite and N-Latex serum free light chain assays: a critical review.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Biochemia Medica Pub Date : 2021-10-15 Epub Date: 2021-08-05 DOI:10.11613/BM.2021.030701
Massimo Daves, Andrea Piccin, Vincenzo Roccaforte, Giuseppe Lippi
{"title":"Comparison of Freelite and N-Latex serum free light chain assays: a critical review.","authors":"Massimo Daves,&nbsp;Andrea Piccin,&nbsp;Vincenzo Roccaforte,&nbsp;Giuseppe Lippi","doi":"10.11613/BM.2021.030701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The measurement of serum free light chain (FLC) represents a fundamental aspect on the assessment of patients with monoclonal gammopathies (MG). Different analytical methods for FLC have become available with the possibility to obtain different value with a substantial impact on the assessment of patients with MG. This study aimed to evaluate FLC results obtained with two different assays and how the difference value obtained can impact in the patient's assessment.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Ninety-three patient serum samples that underwent analysis for FLC with two different methods, Serum Freelite (The Binding Site, Birmingham, UK) and N-Latex FLC (Siemens, Marburg, Germany), were included in this retrospective study. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate correlation, difference, and the grade of concordance between the results obtained with the two methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant statistical differences between the results obtained from the two methods were found (P < 0.05). A good correlation was found (0.99 for κ FLC, 0.95 for λ FLC, and 0.94 for the κ/λ ratio, respectively). We found a weighted kappa value of 0.65 for κ/λ ratio, 0.65 for λ FLC and 0.90 for κ FLC. A positive bias found with the Bland-Altman plot mirrors overestimation of κ FLC and κ/λ ratio with Freelite compared to N-Latex, whilst a negative bias underscores underestimation of λ FLC by Freelite compared to N-Latex.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although in general the concordance between Freelite and N-Latex appears satisfactory, several discrepancies could be evidenced and consequently the two assays are not interchangeable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9021,"journal":{"name":"Biochemia Medica","volume":"31 3","pages":"030701"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8340501/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biochemia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2021.030701","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Introduction: The measurement of serum free light chain (FLC) represents a fundamental aspect on the assessment of patients with monoclonal gammopathies (MG). Different analytical methods for FLC have become available with the possibility to obtain different value with a substantial impact on the assessment of patients with MG. This study aimed to evaluate FLC results obtained with two different assays and how the difference value obtained can impact in the patient's assessment.

Materials and methods: Ninety-three patient serum samples that underwent analysis for FLC with two different methods, Serum Freelite (The Binding Site, Birmingham, UK) and N-Latex FLC (Siemens, Marburg, Germany), were included in this retrospective study. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate correlation, difference, and the grade of concordance between the results obtained with the two methods.

Results: Significant statistical differences between the results obtained from the two methods were found (P < 0.05). A good correlation was found (0.99 for κ FLC, 0.95 for λ FLC, and 0.94 for the κ/λ ratio, respectively). We found a weighted kappa value of 0.65 for κ/λ ratio, 0.65 for λ FLC and 0.90 for κ FLC. A positive bias found with the Bland-Altman plot mirrors overestimation of κ FLC and κ/λ ratio with Freelite compared to N-Latex, whilst a negative bias underscores underestimation of λ FLC by Freelite compared to N-Latex.

Conclusion: Although in general the concordance between Freelite and N-Latex appears satisfactory, several discrepancies could be evidenced and consequently the two assays are not interchangeable.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Freelite和N-Latex血清游离轻链分析的比较:综述。
血清游离轻链(FLC)的测定是单克隆伽玛病(MG)患者评估的一个基本方面。不同的FLC分析方法已经可用,有可能获得不同的值,这对MG患者的评估有重大影响。本研究旨在评估两种不同检测方法获得的FLC结果,以及所获得的差异值如何影响患者的评估。材料和方法:采用血清Freelite (The Binding Site, Birmingham, UK)和N-Latex (Siemens, Marburg, Germany)两种不同的方法对93例患者的血清样本进行FLC分析。对两种方法所得结果的相关性、差异性和一致性进行统计分析。结果:两种方法所得结果差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。κ FLC、λ FLC和κ/λ比值具有良好的相关性(分别为0.99、0.95和0.94)。我们发现κ/λ比值的加权kappa值为0.65,λ FLC的加权kappa值为0.65,κ FLC的加权kappa值为0.90。Bland-Altman图中发现的正偏差反映了Freelite与N-Latex相比对κ FLC和κ/λ比值的高估,而负偏差强调了Freelite与N-Latex相比对λ FLC的低估。结论:尽管Freelite和N-Latex之间的一致性总体上令人满意,但也存在一些差异,因此两种检测方法不可互换。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biochemia Medica
Biochemia Medica 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
70
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biochemia Medica is the official peer-reviewed journal of the Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Journal provides a wide coverage of research in all aspects of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine. Following categories fit into the scope of the Journal: general clinical chemistry, haematology and haemostasis, molecular diagnostics and endocrinology. Development, validation and verification of analytical techniques and methods applicable to clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine are welcome as well as studies dealing with laboratory organization, automation and quality control. Journal publishes on a regular basis educative preanalytical case reports (Preanalytical mysteries), articles dealing with applied biostatistics (Lessons in biostatistics) and research integrity (Research integrity corner).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信